mrstickball said:
dsgrue3 said:
mrstickball said:
dsgrue3 said:
sc94597 said:
@dsgrue If you were declared as a terrorist, but you were in fact innocent, how would you maintain your innocence without due process? The issue isn't that it happened, but what it means to give congress and the president such power over citizens with only a manipulation of arbitrary terminology to determine those entitled to due process and those who are not entitled.
"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself." - Thomas Paine
|
Until the government abuses the legislation in this manner, I have no issue with it. But I do see your point.
|
Given NDAA, warentless wiretapping, and other measures... They're doing a pretty swell job.
|
I meant in regard to the NDAA, not the Patriot Act or any other legislation.
|
Look at how they're using all of the other legislation. Its only a matter of time until they start using what's contained in the bills they pass.
|
Yeah, I understand. I'm not blind to corruption, but killing innocents isn't exactly on the agenda.
The Awlaki incident is special because of certain situations concerning it.
1) He posed an imminent threat.
2) He was fighting alongside an enemy of the United States - Al Queda
3) In the chaos of Yemen, there was no way to arrest him.
